# Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007

*From*: moustapha.diaby@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Date*: 13 Feb 2007 12:51:58 -0800

On Feb 13, 10:37 am, t...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

In article <1171376630.989060.181...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

<moustapha.di...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

There is no *mathematical* connection between the polytope of my model

and the TSP polytope. Proposition 1 in my paper shows equivalence of

the feasible set of my model and the assignment polytope. You get a

TSP solution out of it only by interpretation. ...The connection to a

TSP solution is only cognitive (The mathematical connection is to the

assignment polytope as proved in Proposition 1.).

Of course you didn't build your model with what you call a "mathematical"

correspondence to the TSP polytope in mind, and the connection remains

only "cognitive" in *your* mind. However, once your model has been

constructed, one can study it and derive further consequences from

its existence. This is what Moews has done, and he has shown that

from your model, one can derive a *mathematical* connection to the TSP

polytope---

And, which exact formulation of the the TSP polytope did he use to da

that again? ...You don't know what you are saying.

//MD

.

**Follow-Ups**:

**References**:**Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007***From:*Radoslaw Hofman

**Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007***From:*dmoews

**Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007***From:*moustapha . diaby

**Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007***From:*tchow

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007** - Next by Date:
**Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007** - Previous by thread:
**Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007** - Next by thread:
**Re: Hofman and Diaby talk about P=NP at INFORMS 2007** - Index(es):